Here is the Canon EOS R3

[Atlasman]

My guess with Canon apparently releasing an R3 with a gripped body is to release a step-up
pro camera which would buy them some extra time to continue further development and further fine-tune and prefect the top of the line R1 and whatever new or game changing features it will come with. Canon doesn’t want to release their top of the line model just because the market expects it. But it’s exactly that, expectations and market pressure (among a couple of other things), which increased in the industry over the last couple of years. This made Canon release the EOS R as it’s introduction model into the mirrorless universe. It enabled them to release the RF mount and line of lenses gradually and prior to any high specs body. Although as the last of the bunch and a bit late, clever move in my opinion. More importantly, it allowed customers to get used to the new system and provide very valuable first feedback which eventually (and with the RP and R Astro as intermediate stops) resulted in the very much anticipated R5 and R6. No doubt that the anticipation and initial EOS R strategy contributed to the R5’s and R6’ success. In that sense it makes much sense to initially split the introduction of a true pro line of cameras with an intro model, the R3, and at a later stage a top of the line R1. With Canon’s clear diversification into more « specialised” and “dedicated” bodies, I wouldn’t be surprised if the R3 and potential R1 would continue to exist in parallel as their pro grade cameras but with slightly different usage in mind. Think about it. The R5 amd R6 are in the same kind of though pattern. It’s either that or the “R3” naming is misleaked working name and is eventually gonna change to R1. Either way if the leak is genuine (let’s hope it’s confirmed) it’s clearly not a coincidence.....food for thought....

What you say makes sense: the R1 might not be ready for prime time, but they need to bring something above the R5.

 

[DBounce]

The R3 appears to have a port around the lens mount, that is absent from the 1DXMK3?

 

[H. Jones]

The R3 appears to have a port around the lens mount, that is absent from the 1DXMK3?

View attachment 196921
View attachment 196922

Intervalometer port like on the R5. I'm guessing the port-side of the camera has the microphone and headphone jack more spaced out than the 1DX Mark III, which makes it safe to assume the R3 probably has a flip-out tilty screen, since there's nothing else that could hog so much room on that side than more-spaced out ports.

 

[croviking]

Do mirrorless cameras need to be so ugly and big? Looking into its texture, it looks like a camera for a fishermen

If it comes with weather proofing that would satisfy fisherman application, I'm interested...

 

[.jan]

Intervalometer port like on the R5. I'm guessing the port-side of the camera has the microphone and headphone jack more spaced out than the 1DX Mark III, which makes it safe to assume the R3 probably has a flip-out tilty screen, since there's nothing else that could hog so much room on that side than more-spaced out ports.

I generally agree and think it is the flip-out screen. However it could also be a result of the body being less thick as there is no need for mirror box bulk anymore.

 

[swkitt]

With grip included, it looks to me like a sports still camera.
I'd guess 30fps, crazy autofocus and ISO/noise features at around 25-30MP (or a bit more to allow various crop modes to get different shots without changing lens). And big battery of course to shoot a lot of frames.

 

[mrfig]

Do mirrorless cameras need to be so ugly and big? Looking into its texture, it looks like a camera for a fishermen

I guess "beauty is in the eye of the beholder". I personally like the look of it - way prefer it over the chromified Leica type cameras!

 

[DBounce]

Intervalometer port like on the R5. I'm guessing the port-side of the camera has the microphone and headphone jack more spaced out than the 1DX Mark III, which makes it safe to assume the R3 probably has a flip-out tilty screen, since there's nothing else that could hog so much room on that side than more-spaced out ports.

Or Timecode in for the all important (these days anyway) “Netflix“ approval? The back is what I want to see.

 

[CaMeRa QuEsT]

The 3 would suggest eyesight focus point selection, if we go back to the last EOS 3.

 

[H. Jones]

Or Timecode in for the all important (these days anyway) “Netflix“ approval? The back is what I want to see.

I am skeptical that a timecode port would be included in a 1D series camera, as timecode ports have a decent amount of depth to them and would require the port to physically extend from the body.

That does bring me to another thought I've been having, though. If this is the R3, perhaps the eventual R1 is more into hybrid flagship stills/cinema camera territory and will be a $10,000~ camera with pro cinema camera features plus cutting edge stills performance. An 8K full frame top-of-the-line cinema/stills hybrid could definitely warrant a much higher price than a routine 1DX, and would easily beat out the $6000 C70. The C500 Mark III was $15,000 and still manages to sell well.

 

[DBounce]

Quick note: the R3 battery does not appear to be compatible with the 1DXMK3. If both images are to scale, which would appear the case, given that the lens diameter seems to match, then the battery end cap is clearly longer on the R3.

 

[Stuart]

Is this a 120MP movable curved sensor that allow MF grade product/fashion shooting in the studio with post process selectable focus points? Paired with those fixed curved sensor lenses this might be super capable. Maybe even 3D images too.

 

[Ozarker]

Two thoughts.
1) The R3 gets a lower MP sensor than the R1 (meaning the 75MP in this rumor is wrong) and the R1 becomes top of line (but without integrated vertical grip) because more MP = better camera.
2) Canon want to make more money out of landscape photographers and an extra $200 of manufacturing costs lets them up the price by $2000.

How do you know what the cost differential is? Also, does it even matter? A product sells for whatever the market supports. If they cost five cents to make, the retail price is set to what Canon believes Canon can get.

 

[Dphotos]

First off it looks like every other Canon body. I have been shooting for 41 years and the Canons have always fit my hand perfectly. When Sony and Fuji came out with their mirrorless bodies they were too small and they did not fit the users hand well. I believe the exterior of every new Canon body will look the same for a very long time. I am waiting for a camera that is able to take pictures in very low light with very little grain. Canon has not reached that level yet. The expensive production video cameras have always been able to shoot in low light better than a still camera. I would like to see a camera that can shoot RAW at 4 different levels to pick from. When shooting you don’t always need a high RAW file for every job.

 

[Canfan]

Interesting....my first thought is that it is very pretty. My second thought is calling it a 3 series is a way to make the 1DxMkIII owners feel less bad about the short supremacy cycle for that camera. So with this camera at $7k, that leaves room for a $10k 1 series. The new Canon pricing is grand. Actually many grand!

-Brian
(for those who may not know, in the US 'a grand' is a slang term for one thousand dollars)

I don't understand why buyer's of 1DXIII will feel buyer's remorse a new mirrorless camera. the 1DXIII by no means is a slouch. It id still a phenomenal camera no matter what is released. Competition is pretty stiff and extending market cycles of technology doesn't make sense. At least that's not sony or any of the smartphones game plan.
Pros don't like changing their gear frequently because getting used to new gear or technology takes time and effort, which is a luxury for a busy professional.
Don't think it would matter if they release an R1 now as it would sell just the same. those who can afford it would get it in a heart beat.

 

[JuanMa]

Considering the price of the R5, this will be between 100.000 and 200.000$.

Just kidding…

 

[slclick]

did the 3 really sit between though? I was always under the impression that it was the upscale successor of the 5 as I never saw them available simultaneously.

How is the timeline relevant? Yeah the 5 was from 92 and the 3 in 98. It sits in between, it just wasn't launched as such. The nitpicking here is world class.

 

[tron]

The 3 would suggest eyesight focus point selection, if we go back to the last EOS 3.

EOS 5 and EOS50E had that feature too....

 

[Aaron D]

I like it!

And yeah, I just bought an R5, so I'm hoping this is NOT the camera of my dreams--whatever that would be.

 

[.jan]

How is the timeline relevant? Yeah the 5 was from 92 and the 3 in 98. It sits in between, it just wasn't launched as such. The nitpicking here is world class.

It's not nitpicking, though. I can't find a single source that doesn't say that the 3 replaced the 5. But feel free to enlighten us.